If
I have a "hot button" issue, this is definitely it.
Don't even THINK about taking my guns! My rights are not negotiable, and
I am totally unwilling to compromise when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Let
me reiterate an axiom of my philosophy. Rights and privileges
are polar opposites. A right is something that I can do without asking.
A privilege is something that a higher authority allows me to do. It is
utter nonsense for us to accept government permits in order to exercise
an inalienable right. Allow me to point out some fallacies in the arguments
frequently used by the anti-gun movement.

First, it is impossible
for the Second Amendment to confer a "community right", because
communities HAVE no rights.
Individuals are real. Communities are abstract concepts. You can have
individuals without communities, but you cannot have communities without
individuals. Ergo, individuals must come first, and only the individuals
that make up a community can have rights.

Second,
the phrase "well regulated militia" is frequently misconstrued
to mean:a) lots of government regulations; and,b) only the National Guard is allowed to carry guns.

It is necessary to understand
the definitions common in America during the time of our war for independence.
"Well regulated" used to mean "well prepared". Every
man was expected to have a rifle, one pound of gun powder, and sixteen
balls for his weapon. He was also expected to be ready to USE that rifle
within sixty seconds of the alarm being sounded. Hence the term "minute
man".

It is disingenuous for anyone
to promote the argument that "militia" refers only to the National
Guard in light of the fact that the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791,
and the National Guard wasn't formed until the early 1900's. This argument
is totally without merit, unless you want to imply that our founding fathers
were able to predict the future.

I sincerely believe
that statistical evidence supports the idea that crime increases exponentially
wherever gun control is instituted as the governing policy.
Washington DC, New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles have the strictest gun
control policies in the United States. The cities with the highest murder
rates are Washington DC, New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. It doesn't
take a PhD to be able to draw the proper conclusion from this evidence.
England and Australia have recently instituted strict gun control measures,
and both countries have seen the statistics on violent crime quadruple.
In contrast, I am told that the city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed a municipal
ordinance that requires homeowners to have a firearm available. Home invasions
have dropped to less than 10% of their original rate, indicating to me
that criminals value their lives more than they value your property.

I have no doubt that members
of the anti-gun crowd would be happy to offer statistical data which appears
to contradict the numbers I have just mentioned. Even if they could, their
alternate statistics are not enough authority to strip me of my inalienable
right to keep and bear arms. My rights are non-negotiable. I don't care
if someone else doesn't like it. I don't care if they toss and turn at
night, anxiously worried about what I might do with my firearm. My rights
are not predicated on whether or not you LIKE what I'm doing. You only
have a complaint when I present a "clear and present danger",
which is not the case if I have my firearm in a holster.

Repealing unconstitutional
gun control laws will be one of my first priorities as President of the
United States.